TSTP Solution File: SWV112+1 by SPASS---3.9
View Problem
- Process Solution
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
% File : SPASS---3.9
% Problem : SWV112+1 : TPTP v8.1.0. Bugfixed v3.3.0.
% Transfm : none
% Format : tptp
% Command : run_spass %d %s
% Computer : n032.cluster.edu
% Model : x86_64 x86_64
% CPU : Intel(R) Xeon(R) CPU E5-2620 v4 2.10GHz
% Memory : 8042.1875MB
% OS : Linux 3.10.0-693.el7.x86_64
% CPULimit : 300s
% WCLimit : 600s
% DateTime : Wed Jul 20 21:41:19 EDT 2022
% Result : Theorem 2.80s 3.05s
% Output : Refutation 2.80s
% Verified :
% SZS Type : -
% Comments :
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
%----WARNING: Could not form TPTP format derivation
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
%----ORIGINAL SYSTEM OUTPUT
% 0.00/0.10 % Problem : SWV112+1 : TPTP v8.1.0. Bugfixed v3.3.0.
% 0.00/0.10 % Command : run_spass %d %s
% 0.10/0.30 % Computer : n032.cluster.edu
% 0.10/0.30 % Model : x86_64 x86_64
% 0.10/0.30 % CPU : Intel(R) Xeon(R) CPU E5-2620 v4 @ 2.10GHz
% 0.10/0.30 % Memory : 8042.1875MB
% 0.10/0.30 % OS : Linux 3.10.0-693.el7.x86_64
% 0.10/0.30 % CPULimit : 300
% 0.10/0.30 % WCLimit : 600
% 0.10/0.30 % DateTime : Tue Jun 14 20:11:58 EDT 2022
% 0.10/0.30 % CPUTime :
% 2.80/3.05
% 2.80/3.05 SPASS V 3.9
% 2.80/3.05 SPASS beiseite: Proof found.
% 2.80/3.05 % SZS status Theorem
% 2.80/3.05 Problem: /export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/theBenchmark.p
% 2.80/3.05 SPASS derived 7504 clauses, backtracked 277 clauses, performed 3 splits and kept 3860 clauses.
% 2.80/3.05 SPASS allocated 92759 KBytes.
% 2.80/3.05 SPASS spent 0:00:02.69 on the problem.
% 2.80/3.05 0:00:00.03 for the input.
% 2.80/3.05 0:00:00.06 for the FLOTTER CNF translation.
% 2.80/3.05 0:00:00.07 for inferences.
% 2.80/3.05 0:00:00.05 for the backtracking.
% 2.80/3.05 0:00:02.32 for the reduction.
% 2.80/3.05
% 2.80/3.05
% 2.80/3.05 Here is a proof with depth 1, length 39 :
% 2.80/3.05 % SZS output start Refutation
% 2.80/3.05 1[0:Inp] || -> SkC0*.
% 2.80/3.05 2[0:Inp] || -> SkC1*.
% 2.80/3.05 3[0:Inp] || -> SkC2*.
% 2.80/3.05 8[0:Inp] || -> leq(n0,skc9)*r.
% 2.80/3.05 9[0:Inp] || -> leq(n0,skc8)*r.
% 2.80/3.05 10[0:Inp] || -> leq(n0,pv5)*r.
% 2.80/3.05 49[0:Inp] || -> equal(succ(n0),n1)**.
% 2.80/3.05 57[0:Inp] || -> leq(pv5,minus(n999,n1))*r.
% 2.80/3.05 59[0:Inp] || -> equal(succ(succ(n0)),n2)**.
% 2.80/3.05 76[0:Inp] || -> equal(pred(succ(u)),u)**.
% 2.80/3.05 78[0:Inp] || -> equal(succ(succ(succ(n0))),n3)**.
% 2.80/3.05 82[0:Inp] || -> equal(plus(n1,u),succ(u))**.
% 2.80/3.05 83[0:Inp] || -> equal(minus(u,n1),pred(u))**.
% 2.80/3.05 85[0:Inp] || -> equal(succ(succ(succ(succ(n0)))),n4)**.
% 2.80/3.05 95[0:Inp] || -> equal(succ(succ(succ(succ(succ(n0))))),n5)**.
% 2.80/3.05 111[0:Inp] || -> equal(succ(succ(succ(succ(succ(succ(n0)))))),n6)**.
% 2.80/3.05 138[0:Inp] || leq(n0,pv5) leq(pv5,minus(n999,n1)) SkC0 SkC1 SkC2 -> leq(skc9,minus(n6,n1))*r.
% 2.80/3.05 141[0:Inp] || leq(n0,pv5) leq(pv5,minus(n999,n1)) SkC0 SkC1 SkC2 -> leq(skc8,minus(plus(n1,pv57),n1))*r.
% 2.80/3.05 144[0:Inp] || equal(a_select3(id_ds1_filter,skc9,skc8),a_select3(id_ds1_filter,skc8,skc9))** leq(n0,pv5) leq(pv5,minus(n999,n1)) SkC0 SkC1 SkC2 -> .
% 2.80/3.05 145[0:Inp] || leq(n0,u) leq(u,pv57) leq(v,minus(n6,n1)) leq(n0,v) -> equal(a_select3(id_ds1_filter,u,v),a_select3(id_ds1_filter,v,u))*.
% 2.80/3.05 174[0:Rew:49.0,59.0] || -> equal(succ(n1),n2)**.
% 2.80/3.05 177[0:Rew:174.0,78.0,49.0,78.0] || -> equal(succ(n2),n3)**.
% 2.80/3.05 179[0:Rew:177.0,85.0,174.0,85.0,49.0,85.0] || -> equal(succ(n3),n4)**.
% 2.80/3.05 182[0:Rew:179.0,95.0,177.0,95.0,174.0,95.0,49.0,95.0] || -> equal(succ(n4),n5)**.
% 2.80/3.05 185[0:Rew:182.0,111.0,179.0,111.0,177.0,111.0,174.0,111.0,49.0,111.0] || -> equal(succ(n5),n6)**.
% 2.80/3.05 189[0:Rew:83.0,57.0] || -> leq(pv5,pred(n999))*r.
% 2.80/3.05 193[0:Rew:83.0,138.5,83.0,138.1] || leq(n0,pv5) leq(pv5,pred(n999)) SkC0 SkC1 SkC2 -> leq(skc9,pred(n6))*r.
% 2.80/3.05 194[0:MRR:193.0,193.1,193.2,193.3,193.4,10.0,189.0,1.0,2.0,3.0] || -> leq(skc9,pred(n6))*r.
% 2.80/3.05 195[0:Rew:83.0,144.2] || equal(a_select3(id_ds1_filter,skc9,skc8),a_select3(id_ds1_filter,skc8,skc9))** leq(n0,pv5) leq(pv5,pred(n999)) SkC0 SkC1 SkC2 -> .
% 2.80/3.05 196[0:MRR:195.1,195.2,195.3,195.4,195.5,10.0,189.0,1.0,2.0,3.0] || equal(a_select3(id_ds1_filter,skc9,skc8),a_select3(id_ds1_filter,skc8,skc9))** -> .
% 2.80/3.05 197[0:Rew:76.0,141.5,82.0,141.5,83.0,141.5,83.0,141.1] || leq(n0,pv5) leq(pv5,pred(n999))*r SkC0 SkC1 SkC2 -> leq(skc8,pv57).
% 2.80/3.05 198[0:MRR:197.0,197.1,197.2,197.3,197.4,10.0,189.0,1.0,2.0,3.0] || -> leq(skc8,pv57)*l.
% 2.80/3.05 199[0:Rew:83.0,145.2] || leq(u,pv57) leq(v,pred(n6)) leq(n0,v) leq(n0,u) -> equal(a_select3(id_ds1_filter,u,v),a_select3(id_ds1_filter,v,u))*.
% 2.80/3.05 833[0:SpR:185.0,76.0] || -> equal(pred(n6),n5)**.
% 2.80/3.05 848[0:Rew:833.0,194.0] || -> leq(skc9,n5)*l.
% 2.80/3.05 7534[0:Rew:833.0,199.1] || leq(u,pv57) leq(v,n5) leq(n0,v) leq(n0,u) -> equal(a_select3(id_ds1_filter,u,v),a_select3(id_ds1_filter,v,u))*.
% 2.80/3.05 9822[0:SpL:7534.4,196.0] || leq(skc8,pv57) leq(skc9,n5) leq(n0,skc9) leq(n0,skc8) equal(a_select3(id_ds1_filter,skc8,skc9),a_select3(id_ds1_filter,skc8,skc9))* -> .
% 2.80/3.05 9823[0:Obv:9822.4] || leq(skc8,pv57) leq(skc9,n5)*l leq(n0,skc9) leq(n0,skc8) -> .
% 2.80/3.05 9824[0:MRR:9823.0,9823.1,9823.2,9823.3,198.0,848.0,8.0,9.0] || -> .
% 2.80/3.05 % SZS output end Refutation
% 2.80/3.05 Formulae used in the proof : quaternion_ds1_symm_0005 gt_succ leq_succ_gt_equiv successor_1 successor_2 pred_succ successor_3 succ_plus_1_l pred_minus_1 successor_4 successor_5 successor_6
% 2.80/3.05
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------